My source is http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:_x-QR4l-pYQJ:www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/CIB/2002-03/03cib05.pdf+stem+cell+ethical+issues&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us. It was published on the 12th of November, 2002, and written by Dr. Maurice Rickard. The source is a briefing report prepared for the Australian parliament to bring them up to speed on the ethical issues surrounding stem cells. The report doesn’t take sides and presents the issues and the different viewpoints. I think this source is effective because it is a non-biased introduction to the issue, designed to give decision-makers the facts they needed to make laws - which also worked for me, because I needed an outline of the issues and the facts as well, but for a different purpose. I would recommend this to other students.
Trevor
My source is http://www.2facts.com which was published on August 13, 1999. The article that I read from this website was written for educational purposes. The article which I used did not appear to be biased. I felt as if it displayed both sides of the argument in an equal manner. As I used this source, I did not feel that I was read persuasive material as it does not take sides in either argument, rather it was their for educational reference. The information was very factual and provided me with insight into both sides of Stem Cells. I thought this website was very helpful for myself as it served as an unbiased factual database which I was able to use to find out more about the social issues concerning embryonic stem cell research. I would recommend it to another student because it has information on many other topics, not just bioethics. It provides viewpoints from two or more perspectives which helps a researcher, like myself, learn every aspect of the issue. This helps the researcher develop and formulate their own opinions after reading every aspect.
Pete
My source is http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:_x-QR4l-pYQJ:www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/CIB/2002-03/03cib05.pdf+stem+cell+ethical+issues&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us. It was published on the 12th of November, 2002, and written by Dr. Maurice Rickard. The source is a briefing report prepared for the Australian parliament to bring them up to speed on the ethical issues surrounding stem cells. The report doesn’t take sides and presents the issues and the different viewpoints. I think this source is effective because it is a non-biased introduction to the issue, designed to give decision-makers the facts they needed to make laws - which also worked for me, because I needed an outline of the issues and the facts as well, but for a different purpose. I would recommend this to other students.
Trevor
My source is http://www.2facts.com which was published on August 13, 1999. The article that I read from this website was written for educational purposes. The article which I used did not appear to be biased. I felt as if it displayed both sides of the argument in an equal manner. As I used this source, I did not feel that I was read persuasive material as it does not take sides in either argument, rather it was their for educational reference. The information was very factual and provided me with insight into both sides of Stem Cells. I thought this website was very helpful for myself as it served as an unbiased factual database which I was able to use to find out more about the social issues concerning embryonic stem cell research. I would recommend it to another student because it has information on many other topics, not just bioethics. It provides viewpoints from two or more perspectives which helps a researcher, like myself, learn every aspect of the issue. This helps the researcher develop and formulate their own opinions after reading every aspect.